Close to 80%of Americans Support a Public Option

[Blue Square Thing]

Originally Posted by DrWho17

Here is an interesting summary of a study for those who like to use life expectancy as a measure of a healthcare systems effectiveness Race, Income, Geography Influence US Life Expectancy.

"The differences were attributed to a combination of injuries and such preventable risk factors as smoking, alcohol, obesity, high blood pressure, elevated cholesterol, diet and physical inactivity -- particularly among people from 15 years to 59 years of age. They were not due to income, insurance, infant mortality, AIDS or violence, said the study's lead investigator, Christopher J.L. Murray, director of the Harvard Initiative for Global Health. "

The conclusion to Murray et al's 2006 study (available online at PLoS Medicine: Eight Americas: Investigating Mortality Disparities across Races, Counties, and Race-Counties in the United States) actually reads (my emphasis):

"Disparities in mortality across the eight Americas, each consisting of millions or tens of millions of Americans, are enormous by all international standards. The observed disparities in life expectancy cannot be explained by race, income, or basic health-care access and utilization alone. Because policies aimed at reducing fundamental socioeconomic inequalities are currently practically absent in the US, health disparities will have to be at least partly addressed through public health strategies that reduce risk factors for chronic diseases and injuries."

I would suggest that the addition of the word alone is extremely significant in altering the entire emphasis of the findings of the study. Of course, I'd also point at the obvious implication that preventative medicine is not as effective as it should be in the US system.

This is reinforced by the findings of a similar study (Murray et al (2008) 'The Reversal of Fortunes: Trends in County Mortality and Cross-County Mortality Disparities in the United States' PLoS Medicine April 2008 [online]. Available from PLoS Medicine: The Reversal of Fortunes: Trends in County Mortality and Cross-County Mortality Disparities in the United States) which concluded:

"There was a steady increase in mortality inequality across the US counties between 1983 and 1999, resulting from stagnation or increase in mortality among the worst-off segment of the population. Female mortality increased in a large number of counties, primarily because of chronic diseases related to smoking, overweight and obesity, and high blood pressure."

There's also an article by Kreiger et al (2008) (availble online at PLoS Medicine: The Fall and Rise of US Inequities in Premature Mortality: 1960–2002) which adds a little to the emphasis of the arguments as well - basically saying that it doesn't have to be this way.

The poor relative performance of much of the US's preventative/educational health care appears to be supported by the summaries of two new studies by Michaud and Preston - the summary is available at Healthcare revamp won't cure America - health - 28 August 2009 - New Scientist I haven't read the studies themselves yet.

[TheCouga]

Originally Posted by DrWho17

Of course Fidel Castro's health ministry wouldn't lie about their numbers either would they? I'll believe his health care numbers when he tells us how many political dissidents he has in prison. Here is a compilation of pictures from state run Cuban medical facilities Hospital Clínico Quirúrgico

Here is an interesting summary of a study for those who like to use life expectancy as a measure of a healthcare systems effectiveness Race, Income, Geography Influence US Life Expectancy.

"The differences were attributed to a combination of injuries and such preventable risk factors as smoking, alcohol, obesity, high blood pressure, elevated cholesterol, diet and physical inactivity -- particularly among people from 15 years to 59 years of age. They were not due to income, insurance, infant mortality, AIDS or violence, said the study's lead investigator, Christopher J.L. Murray, director of the Harvard Initiative for Global Health. "

Cuba's a much poorer country due to a number of circumstances. It has internal problems, and the trade embargo has severely damaged their economy. Despite this and the poor quality of their hospitals, it seems that their healthcare system seems to produce some pretty acceptable results given the circumstances.

You're creating a straw man here by bringing up conditions in Cuba that are unrelated to it's style of healthcare and attributing them to its style of healthcare. Nobody thinks Cuba is a land of economic paradise. But Cuba's problems have nothing to do with the way they administer their healthcare.